LAKSHACHANDI APARTMENT ABCD CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 41 (4)(2), MUMBAI

In the instant case, the Assessee’s claim for deduction of Rs.9,07,260/- u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act has been denied by the AO and the Ld. Commissioner, on account of a delay of just one day, in filing the return of income.

We are not impressed by such findings. Though the administrative power to condone the delay u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act is exercisable by the authorities specified or authorised by the CBDT, however the existence of such administrative mechanism does not curtail the statutory appellate jurisdiction vested in the Ld. Commissioner under sections 250 and 251 of the Act. The Ld. Commissioner is required to examine the correctness of the disallowance made by the AO and determine whether the Assessee’s case falls within the scope of the condonation of delay. Therefore, the appeal could not have been rejected merely by observing that the Ld. Commissioner does not possess the administrative power of condonation u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act.

We further observe that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Association of Indian Panelboard Manufacturer vs. DCIT, in R/Tax Appeal No. 655/2022 decided on 21/03/2022 has also dealt with identical Circular and issue, wherein Tribunal refused to entertain condonation of delay in filing of Form 10B on the ground that as per CBDT Circular No. 07/2018 dated 20/12/2018, the powers have been vested with certain authorities for condonation of delay u/sec. 119 of the Act, and held as under:

Thus, from the decision of the Hon'ble High Court, it has become clear that CBDT by issuing Circular {as relied on by the Ld. Commissioner in this case} entrusted the powers to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) or Chief Commissioner of Income Tax for condonation of delay in filing appropriate Forms for claiming deductions as applicable, but has not created any bar or not curtailed the powers of the appellate authorities, which are otherwise, entrusted under the Statute to condone the respective delay(s). 7. In fact, CBDT Circular no. 06/2020 dated 19/02/2020 is ancillary to the respective provision and/or the powers of the appellate authorities for condonation of delay in appropriate and deserving cases for filing of proper Forms, as prescribed and required. 8. Though the aforesaid judgment relates to the delayed occurred in furnishing of an audit report, however the underlying principle applies to the facts of the present case as well, where the return of income is filed with a delay of only one day. 9. Nevertheless, CBDT Circular No. 14/2024 dated 30.10.2024 extends the benefit of Circular No. 13/2023 to the A.Y. 2023-24 and provides for condonation of delay in filing returns by eligible co-

Thus, considering that the delay is only of one day, we deem it appropriate to condone the same and, accordingly, the delay is condoned. Resultantly, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remanded to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for factual verification of the Assessee’s claim for deduction of Rs.9,07,260/- under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Upon being satisfied that the Assessee is otherwise eligible, the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer shall allow the deduction in accordance with law. Suffice it to say that a reasonable opportunity of being heard shall be afforded to the Assessee.

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.